On Tuesday, 28 March 2017 07:56:57 UTC+3, Will Faught wrote: > > Something I've never seen addressed in the generics tradeoffs debate (not > saying it hasn't been, but I haven't see it personally) >
See https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vrAy9gMpMoS3uaVphB32uVXX4pi-HnNjkMEgyAHX4N4/edit#heading=h.j8r1gvdb6qg9 is that without generics, you're forced to use interface{} > You can also use copy-paste, code-generation. > which just boxes the values anyway. So you're already paying a performance > cost for type-agnostic code without generics. And if you copy/paste code > instead of boxing, you're just bloating the size of the binary like generic > templates would. It seems to me if boxing generics was added, there > wouldn't be a downside: > It would be slower than copy-paste and generated approaches. > if you didn't want to pay the performance cost of boxing generics, then > don't use generics; if you can pay the cost, then use them, and it won't > perform any worse than it would now with interface{}, and perhaps could > perform even better, depending on the semantics and implementation. You > could have the same opt-in performance tax in the form of bloated > binaries/slow builds as well, > When generics are added, then they will be (almost) impossible to avoid. So the opt-in "slow builds" isn't really opt-in unless you really try... > but lack of an official debugger right now is predicated on builds being > fast, so that seems like a no-go. > > On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 12:10:08 PM UTC-7, Mandolyte wrote: >> >> The recent survey reveled that generics was thing that would improve Go >> the most. But at 16%, the responses were rather spread out and only 1/3 >> seemed to think that Go needed any improvement at all - see link #1. I >> think most will concede that generics would help development of algorithms, >> libraries, and frameworks. So in the spirit of friendly rivalry, here is a >> list of algorithms developed for Swift: >> >> https://github.com/raywenderlich/swift-algorithm-club >> >> As you might guess, it is chock-full of generics. Yeah, I'm a little >> envious. :-) enjoy... >> >> >> >> #1 https://blog.golang.org/survey2016-results >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
